Don’t forget we moved!
https://brandmu.day/
IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance
-
@sao hahaha that’s how to win my male pc’s hots and heart too.
-
@spiriferida said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
At the point where it’s a repeated problem with the player’s behavior I’m more inclined to skip the IC part and just tell them to stop it OOC and we’re moving on without addressing it IC at all - they don’t get what they want wrt getting attention and other people don’t have to rp around/about the disruption. but I’ll admit my tolerance for a soft retcon is possibly higher than most, and my willingness to rp about people’s drama when it’s happening on repeat is also very low
Soft retcons build up and become very frustrating, especially when a) the problem player learns nothing, and b) the problem player feeds a whole bunch of other players a load of misinformation about things, IC and OOC to the point that the entire community understanding of a situation can shift for the worse.
That said, I absolutely agree that you can’t fix an OOC problem with IC solutions - IC consequences for a character should at least try to be fun for the player (because it’s a game and the ideal is that everyone is having fun even if their character is in a rough spot), but when you realize that a player is deliberately exploiting other players’ attempts to build a healthy and congenial environment? Remove the player. Don’t try to ‘teach them IC’ because, in every case I’ve ever seen, the problem was never a lack of IC or OOC knowledge. It was that they did not agree with the IC reality and so simply chose to do their own thing and fuck anyone who’s attempt to play the actual game was impacted.
Boot, lock door behind, move on.
-
@Faraday said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
It’s interesting to see the various experiences. I’ve never seen folks deliberately exclude someone for sucking at dice rolls. What I do see is the player with the crappy rolls getting bent out of shape
I’ve seen it a small handful of times. Certainly much less often than the unlucky-roller getting bent out of shape.
And yeah, it’s associated with certain crowds.
The time this happened with me, I go to investigate The Thing with another PC. Other PC ignores my PC saying, “we won’t be able to communicate once we’re inside, so we need to make a plan to reconn” and just goes in. My PC is ICly concerned, and I OOCly don’t want to spend the scene standing around while Other PC does All The Things. So I also try to get in, and botch. With seven or eight dice. The result was pretty hilarious and a lot of fun, and the scene an OOC and IC success by my count. But thereafter, Other PC ICly thinks mine a fuck-up, somebody to avoid working with.
'Course, opportunities for PCs in that faction to do anything were few and far between, and I can’t be sure that I was ever thus excluded from anything that actually happened. I later learned I was target of a smear campaign, but at the time it came across as being disinvited based on a single roll, which I rolled with very happily.
'You ride the mechanical bull, you do not fight it.'
-
@Gashlycrumb said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
But thereafter, Other PC ICly thinks mine a fuck-up, somebody to avoid working with.
I mean…unpopular opinion maybe but I think that’s a perfectly reasonable IC reaction to the situation you described.
But OOCly, I wouldn’t let that stand in the way of RP. It could be a fun storyline, even, where Skeptic is forced to go on missions with PerceivedScrewup, only to have their perceptions challenged when PerceivedScrewup doesn’t screw up again. Or PerceivedScrewup has a crisis of confidence because they screwed up in a clutch moment and must work to regain their mojo.
-
@sao it was hot
-
@Faraday Yep. It would have been fun if it was an element to RP with, rather than a reason to be removed from RP.
Pretty much like any IC failure.
-
A little late to the discussion and likely this may is already been contributed. There is a saying that I will likely miss quote and I do not know who to contribute it too, but it my mind this whole subject hinges on it.
That is - what is the difference between reality and science fiction? Science Fiction has to make sense.
I think as long as the GM is open and transparent with players, both on an OOC and IC level, so they don’t feel like the GM is after one particular out come, and the player has some ‘force’ seeking them out most players will accept that.
But if you just pull it out of the blue that x happened, and as the GM there was no way communicated. And that it was because your player did or didnt actions y and z, and as a GM I never made it clear IC or OOC that those actions were unwise or options. I think that’s when players get flustered.
It comes down leaving bread crumbs. Don’t assume a player thinks about the things that the GM thinks about. GM sets a stage, gives direction, and advises (IC and OOC) along the way.
As an after thought edit - I do believe some players will get upset no matter what you do as a GM as well
-
I have at times as a GM been heavy handed in explaining consequences to people IC before they happen. It still gets lost over time and takes people by surprise. Going forward I think I’m just going to keep reiterating every scene consequences may crop up.
-
@Kassien said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
what is the difference between reality and science fiction? Science Fiction has to make sense.
For your, hopefully, edification:
The difference between reality and fiction? Fiction has to make sense. Attributed to Tom Clancy, though there are similar quotes from Mark Twain: “Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities, truth isn’t” and G.K. Chesterton: “Truth must necessarily be stranger than fiction, for fiction is the creation of the human mind and therefore congenial to it.” -
I can’t stand playing heroes most the time.
I don’t mind at all when my characters die. It doesn’t upset me as I guide them into consequences. The same with failure and losing. I’ve never griped in my years of mushing once about consequences.
I think I would rather play nothing but NPC villains and grey/dark characters if I could have my druthers and ultimate RP enjoyment. I like temporary characters that are impactful but don’t need to run years. I don’t get too attached.
Mostly I play grey hats and in knowing that about my staff I’m always open to staff and consequences and I’m very easy to work with when approached about them. But that’s my perspective. I don’t like playing the hero much, so I don’t need to win, really, ever. In fact, I mostly lose in the end.
I think I’m in the minority there?
-
@Buttercup said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
I’ve never griped in my years of mushing once about consequences.
-
@Buttercup I had to request Arx staff a log of you threatening in pages to have them overrule my character about IC consequences yours earned.
-
@Buttercup said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
I can’t stand playing heroes most the time.
I don’t mind at all when my characters die. It doesn’t upset me as I guide them into consequences. The same with failure and losing. I’ve never griped in my years of mushing once about consequences.
You have griped about your consequences to multiple people I know.
But honestly this to me seems very illustrative of a pretty common MU* thing, which is that players often communicate that they’re much better about consequences than they are in practice.
-
Refresh my memory?
Not sure who you were on Arx?
I never argued with staff much about it. I don’t necessarily agree with character driven consequences. I did complain about players who couldn’t separate IC and OOC.
I’m assuming it’s an Abbas related thing?
-
I should probably clarify. I accept staff rulings when consequences are sorted out.
I’ve griped or complained about about IC to IC things I didn’t find reasonable and let staff work out the details. But that is why you have staff right? As a vehicle to resolution?
I had multiple PCs die without complaint on the Reach (in fact I was the first PC death there under Atlantis on a dice role).
-
@Buttercup said in IC Consequences and OOC Acceptance:
I don’t necessarily agree with character driven consequences.
Character-driven consequences are probably the most common form of consequence when your actions impact other characters. Like, what does this mean? You only accept staff rulings? If anyone else pushes back, that doesn’t count?
-
Depends on the circumstances? No, I don’t always agree with IC consequences when they aren’t in line with rules from IC characters. Mostly, I’ve not had problems with IC to IC interactions and consequences.
Not saying my perception about myself isn’t wrong. It may be. And I’m open to adjusting.
-
@Buttercup How many people did you page threatening to have staff overrule about IC actions that you can’t recall this occasion? Our only ooc interaction was you paging me these threats and me telling you to go right ahead and go to staff. If that’s an ic/ooc separation issue, it isn’t mine.
-
Did I misremember that you also played Ahriman?
-
While correcting an assertion of fact which may be in error is fine, before this gets too far:
A gentle reminder to stay mindful that we are in Game Gab, not Rough and Rowdy.
